Jim,
Please find comments in-line below...
- Don
On Mar 3, 2010, at 6:08 PM, Jim Walker wrote:
> On 03/ 3/10 06:42 PM, Simon Phipps wrote:
>> I'm pretty unhappy with the appearance of vote fixing this whole episode
>> creates. I'll abstain for now, and sleep on it.
>
> I'm not happy with it either. But, we need to do something.
>
> Think about it.
I have thought about it. You realize that you are saying that if
all 428 members of the electorate vote, the revised constitution
will be approved even if 239 vote against it and 189 vote to approve
it. THIS IS JUST PLAIN WRONG!!! The majority you have defined is
less than 45% of the voting population.
>
> We spent several meetings putting in place reasonable guidelines
> for getting the electorate ready to vote. We gave notice and
> around 90% of the electorate complied without complaint.
>
> Then, after the fact we find out authentication can't be locked down.
Yes. You have found that a few people set up a system based on what
they hoped would become the new constitution. Unfortunately, the vote
has to conform to the rules specified by the current constitution.
The fact that Sun/Oracle hasn't supplied a voting mechanism that you
can use that matches the old constitution is abhorrent, which is why
the OGB is stuck between a rock and a hard place.
>
> Envision what it would have been like if authentication was
> locked down like we thought it would be on the 14th. Would we
> be going through this now?
>
> How many people are complaining while we discuss this on list?
> Does anyone care but us?
For this discussion, I'm not one of you. (I'm not on the OGB.)
I care. I want the vote to be fair for any election in which I
participate!
I said before that I think you have two choices:
1. Electorate: 428 Majority: 215 Quorum: 143
or
2. Electorate: 377 Majority: 189 Quoram: 126
but it is also possible for you to define an electorate somewhere
between 428 and 377 and define the majority to be the smallest
integer greater than 50% of that number. OGBot says we have already
reached quorum no matter which number in this range is chosen.
The question is whether we'll be able to get more than 50% of the
electorate to vote to approve the new constitution and certify that:
1. Only members of the electorate were allowed to vote,
2. no member got more than one vote, and
3. the votes cast were counted accurately.
Can you verify that the e-mail addresses of those 51 people are still
live? Is there any way to determine if any of the 51 possible members
of the electorate tried to authenticate themselves on the test auth,
but have failed to do so on the real auth? Can you use the results of
either of these questions to reduce the 428 member electorate to
something closer to the 377 member electorate?
>
> Cheers,
> Jim
